Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

lists.sr.ht

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 101 posts

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#71

Post by GPerson »

a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #21
websap wrote: post #7

Yikes! I've been a software engineer for over a decade, and I've never had more fun in my career. Running an AI assistant on a cloud machine to pair with me, explore my ideas, learn new tricks, and even write code that I would never write due to timelines and deadlines has been fantastic. Using coding agents to search for patterns, understanding why our abstractions might not be working because of how users integrate…

Why would you ever care about looking at code? Code forges aren't really a useful tool going forward. As agents replace people writing code, the features of code forges really aren't that useful. Nobody will be reviewing agent code other than agents, and you don't need a pull request and code review model for that. Coding is just going to be asking for a result and manually testing it, no real thought about what code…

I find it fulfilling to write and read code. It’s also a powerful technology. That doesn’t just change just because there’s another technology more powerful in certain ways. These are some level 0 reasons to want to read code, but there are lots.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#72

Post by h3lp »

gadflyinyoureye wrote: post #32
websap wrote: post #7

Yikes! I've been a software engineer for over a decade, and I've never had more fun in my career. Running an AI assistant on a cloud machine to pair with me, explore my ideas, learn new tricks, and even write code that I would never write due to timelines and deadlines has been fantastic. Using coding agents to search for patterns, understanding why our abstractions might not be working because of how users integrate…

I think the term vibe coded is unclear. I use agents to do most of my coding work now. Some might call it vibe coded. I use spec driven development of my own design. While the applications are relatively simple, they are reasonably well architected and maintainable. Some would say I a, vibe coding since I don’t really write the code. I say I’m not because I’m thinking through the features more than vibe coders.

Right!!! LLMs are yet another step up the abstraction ladder. Before LLMs I would write code in C or Perl; I didn't care about the machine code it eventually was translated into---the compilers/interpreters evolved to handle that correctly and transparently. Note that this was not always the case; when I started to use computers, we all aspired to master assembly like the apocryphal Mel ( https://users.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/mel.html ) --- we had to pay attention to machine code and assembly language, because the compilers often didn't generate performant code and were occasionally buggy.

People say that LLMs are not like compilers because they are unreliable. I think with time they will get fixed.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#73

Post by bulbar »

GPerson wrote: post #70
VariousPrograms wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people in support of these bans generally aren't interested in "good vibe coded" software. They oppose LLMs altogether on various grounds, not just the output quality. FWIW, if an LLM is writing significant code, I'd consider it vibe coding regardless of your understanding of the code or expert guidance and almost certainly ban-AI people would too. The scale people seem care about when this comes up is code perce…

The tab completion feature a lot of people were using before the term ‘vibecoding’ was coined by the AI dude is or isn’t vibecoding in your view?

Yes, relying on auto complete was frowned upon back then.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#74

Post by GPerson »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #60
a2ff6eeb0 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly; being replaced is inevitable, the machines are going to end up more intelligent than us. At some point in the near to moderate future, selling the output of your brain is no longer going to be economically viable. I hope we'll figure out some equitable society before that, but I'm not going to bet on it, so I'll do what I can to be on the side of the winners.

I think we will, tbh. But I also think these people saying, “how dare you use AI to write code” for ideological reasons or some variation on that theme are silly.

I don’t think they’re silly, though I don’t think it’s right to vilify the end users just because the people who’ve created the technology are criminals and the technology has lots of bad effects overall. Do you think it’s silly if these people protest the technology without vilifying people who choose to use it?

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#75

Post by GPerson »

bulbar wrote: post #73
GPerson wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tab completion feature a lot of people were using before the term ‘vibecoding’ was coined by the AI dude is or isn’t vibecoding in your view?

Yes, relying on auto complete was frowned upon back then.

I’m aware of that. I’m just polling for opinions on the meaning of vibecoding, not whether or not AI is bad.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#76

Post by seabre »

atmanactive wrote: post #30
seabre wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To echo another reply in the thread, but with an example: have you seen the stats for OpenClaw on GitHub just for this week ?: https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/pulse They are trying to avoid that .

Why is that bad?

GitHub seems to be struggling to support agentic and bot-driven software development. OpenClaw is an extreme example, but there are other projects like it that employ the same methods for development. If I were building a source forge in 2026 and wanted to compete with GitHub I would either:

* Not allow these types of projects at all, like sourcehut, or

* Embrace and charge for the capacity/infrastructure it would take to support it, like cursor's play with origin seems to be.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#77

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

g-b-r wrote: post #66
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the main concern, wouldn't banning them from code sharing sites be harmful? If a person can create a project using AI and share it, then people can use their code without having to reinvent it. If it can't be shared, then anybody who wants that functionality will recreate it from scratch, and if they use AI to do so then you have now burned ~2x the compute=electricity=impact.

Vibecoders like to make all kinds of things that already exist, often don't care (or notice) if the AI rewrites everything instead of using what exists, and LLMs love to do that.

Okay, you can pick between 90% NIH with some sharing or 95% NIH because you tried to stop the sharing. The amount doesn't matter; you're still causing more AI use.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#78

Post by orwin »

piloto_ciego wrote: post #61
orwin wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you check the number of open PRs and commit/hour of vibecoded projects? If course they are banned from small community-funded hosts, they eat compute and data for free. Honestly, my vote would have been to make vibe-coded pay per commit, but I guess introducing money is taboo for those communities

I actually would have been fine with this move too, “look, first 5 commits per day are free, after that it’s $cost” would have been fine. But look at the comments and discourse around this. I guarantee you it ain’t about the money.

Look at what happens in codeberg. Small non-commercial, AI driven and even vibe-coded projects are still on the platform. I don't care about what people say, I care about how they act. And to me, codeberg act appropriately.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#79

Post by dogleash »

I thought sourcehut was general purpose git hosting, not open source mission focused like codeberg?

obv they're going to have content restriction, but there is a spectrum from "actually illegal" to "wonderful chaps whom I love but happen to disagree with philosophically." Slop coding is neither of those, but is closer to the latter than I'd expect a general purpose host to draw a line.

Re: Proposal to prohibit vibe coded projects from being hosted on Sourcehut

#80

Post by danirod »

I don't understand the comments section for this post, just like I did not understand the reactions when Codeberg did the same proposal a few weeks ago.

The kind of person who does the research and chooses to use Sourcehut or Codeberg vs just following the masses and using GitHub is exactly the kind of person who would know exactly what they're doing with computers and thus the kind of person that would not be afraid of just actually programming without the use of tools.

I don't have a Sourcehut account (nor a Codeberg account), but I follow a lot of projects that are hosted on those platforms and it's not just platform policies. The ethos is full of "we don't want that thing here". Lots of FOSS projects hosted on both platforms have their own "no AI" policy on the README or similar files.

Which is something that you would already know if you actually used any of these services.

To me, all these "oh my god, I can't believe they are not letting me host all this slop that I generated to fix my exact use case that is unique and will not be useful for anyone else" feels just performative drama.

Post reply on HN